E-discussion: Promoting a territorial approach to migration and development

The migration and development agenda is currently mostly conducted and framed at the national and international levels. Yet, local authorities are at the forefront in confronting the transformations and opportunities that migration brings about, as the drivers and impact of migration are often most strongly felt at the local level.

This is why the Joint Migration and Development Initiative (JMDI) has partnered up with the UNDP ART Initiative and the EUNOMAD network to launch this joint e-discussion titled:

PROMOTING A TERRITORIAL APPROACH TO MIGRATION AND DEVELOPMENT:THE PRACTICES, FRAMEWORKS AND STRATEGIES OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO HARNESS THE POTENTIAL OF MIGRATION FOR DEVELOPMENT”

You can join the discussion by sending your contribution directly to m4d@groups.dev-nets.org or by uploading it in the below provided comment section.

This e-discussion is now closed. To access to the summary, please click here.

Over four weeks, this e-discussion seeked to redress the limited inter-institutional possibilities available to Regional and Local Authorities (RLAS) to exchange with counterparts in other countries in the area of migration and development. The questions of this e-discussion are framed with a view to enable RLAs to access and share knowledge and learn directly from the accomplishments of others. We particularly encouraged contributions from those M4D Net Members who are RLAs or are dealing through their M&D initiatives with RLAs.

We hope that this e-discussion established meaningful dialogue between RLAs, civil society organisations and M&D experts, and thus contributed to a sustainable and participative approach to migration and development governance at the local level.

QUESTIONS

Week 1:

How can RLAS both in residence and origin countries better make use of decentralized cooperation frameworks to deal and manage issues related to migration and development?

What type of coordination mechanism are available / or should be made available so that such initiatives are aligned with national strategies?

What strategies can RLAs adopt to share lessons learned and best practices with other RLAs/national governments or other key stakeholders?

Do you know of any examples/structures where migration was included into territorial development planning?

What where the main factors and challenges for dealing with migration as a cross-cutting issue in development planning?

Week 2:

Could you share some best practices carried out by RLAs both in residence and origin countries that specifically target the integration and social inclusion of migrants and potentially linked this effort with co-development projects?

What are the main challenges for RLAs in making sure that migrants are active players in local governance and active citizenship and what can migrants themselves and /or other civil society organizations do to raise awareness about their needs and potentials and thus promote better service delivery specifically for migrants?

Week 3:

How can RLAs be successful in their outreach strategy and communication with migrant communities in the country of origin and destination?

Are you aware of consultative processes led by RLAs that engage diaspora groups so that the latter’s activities are in line with local development needs and priorities?

Are there concrete examples on how diaspora groups are involved in the definition of local development planning strategies in your community?

Week 4:

What can RLAs both in countries of origin and destination do in order to provide diaspora groups with an enabling environment (according to the different capitals listed in footnote 2) and how can they facilitate further partnerships with key local stakeholders?

What institutions are at the forefront in making sure that the initiatives of migrants are sustainable and potentially replicated at the local, national or regional level?

What are the challenges to formalize partnerships between migrant and civil society groups and RLAs in the context of M&D initiatives?

Please feel free to respond to as many questions as you please during the following timeframe: 8 July – 4 August 2013. However, if possible please respect the weekly order, so that all members receive coherent responses to the above questions. All contributions received will be incorporated into a consolidated reply once the e-discussion is closed.

The document will be shared with all M4D Net Members.

We look forward to receiving your contributions and please kindly share this email with your networks and colleagues who may have a particular interest an experience in the topics addressed in this e-discussion.

RLAS should further concert/cooperate between homologues in the North and in the South with the aim of building institutional corridors within which actions/projects can be implemented by the various territorial stakeholders: NGOs; diaspora etc. Especially in certain typically public sectors (health; education; etc.) this is the condition for creating sustainable initiatives. Although the diaspora may help/favour certain relationships, it is in the mandate of local authorities to foster such decentralized cooperation schemes/relationships.

- Coordination mechanisms

In countries in the South the extent to which decentralized cooperation is recognized as a fundamental cooperation actor, often depends on the level of decentralization of the country. Furthermore in the South it is often the case that local authorities don’t have competences over migration issues which is a typical “national” issue, dealt by national authorities. In order to create “coordination mechanisms” between decentralized cooperation frameworks RLAs must be in the first place culturally recognized as “key cooperation actors”.

- Share lessons learne

The City of Milano in Italy has been trying to build “horizontal partnerships” with both cities in the north and in the south that either represent long standing partners or partners with whom it is interesting to share competences in specific development fields. Milano is in the process of building a platform for cooperation with Paris and Barcelona and Dakar

- Territorial development strategie

We are more aware of national development strategies where migration has been included, rather than territorial ones. The only country - in our knowledge - that is promoting regional development, bringing in the migration/diaspora component is Morocco through its’ regional development agencies. One of the projects Milano has co-funded through its Call for Projects on Co-development has been realized in Morocco with a Regional Development Agency.

- Factors and challenges

In dealing with migration as a cross cutting issue in development a major challenge is represented by the sectorial separation between integration issues and development at all administrative levels (from the EU to the municipal..), both concerning resources as well as for programming.

Based on the 3 Calls for Projects on Co-development we have launched between 2007 and 2012 we have realized that such mechanisms are best suited and may obtain better results when they reinforce rather than create from scratch, “spontaneous” initiatives, actions that diaspora groups (in partnership with NGOs) were already conducting previous to our support.

A challenge we have also been observing in countries/cities in the South that we have been collaborating for long lasting periods is their transformation from emigration to transit and more recently immigration countries. In this transformation decentralized cooperation can be a useful tool, for exchanging practices– beyond contextual differences and specificities – in order to build more effective responses to such emerging issues.

Let’s spend some time thinking about the relationship between immigrant integration and development. A great deal of work has been done on immigrant integration over the past 25 years, especially their integration in the destination society, but little of this has focused on the development impacts of successful integration. Furthermore, a great deal of attention is now being paid to the potential development benefits of migration, but very little of this has examined the role of integration. Finally, even less time has been spent on the return of migrants to their homelands, the process of re-integration, and the potential development benefits of successful re-integration. This gives us scope for thought in this e-discussion.

How can integration in a destination society support homeland development? Perhaps the most obvious route is through integration in the labour market. Employment supports the sending of remittances which help to alleviate poverty, particularly of the individual families in receipt of remittances. When hometown associations offer collective support, this may foster the development of communities, ideally in ways established through active collaboration between the association abroad and the regional and local authorities in the homeland. Labour market integration is a powerful and fundamental means for development, and is itself supported through broader social integration that can break down barriers to employment for immigrants. However, remittances, whether destined for families or for communities, are simply a form of wealth re-distribution. More powerful still are development activities that enhance wealth creation in the homeland. It is here that integration in the host society and re-integration in the homeland offer their greatest potential and they do this through a reversal of the brain drain.

One of the effects of integration in a developed economy is that immigrants learn how it is that businesses function, how governments function, and in general how effective administration of an organization is carried out. This is a matter of acquiring knowledge of an organization, its operations, and its methods of conducting its affairs, but it is also a matter of learning the values of an organization and how the organization instills its values in its day-to-day operations. Development researchers and practitioners have long spoken of the importance of good governance in the economic development of a society, whether the governance in question is in government itself, in policing, in business, or in other organizations including civil society organizations. Key to effective governance is establishing trust between the organization and those it serves and works with. The rule of law together with vigilance and effective regulation regarding corruption is a highly important fundamental to economic prosperity, as without law and regulation in this regard, the trust required of vibrant economies will not be possible. Experience in organizations that accept these values and have well-established administrative procedures that exemplify them is often acquired by immigrants who are well-integrated into the destination society and its institutions. This is the first half of the process.

When immigrants return to their homelands, as a great many of them do, especially when the homeland economy is on a path towards significant growth, re-integration into the homeland economy and its institutions will facilitate the transfer of their accumulated knowledge, attitudes, and values. Enhanced governance and administration can be a powerful instrument for development. The basis of trust will grow which can remove some of the barriers to investors whether they are local, national, or foreign. Transparent and accountable government and business administration have always been a foundation of economic development, but in an era of globalization where investors have easy access to opportunities around the world, it has become indispensable in the competition for investment and for talent.

Return migration and re-integration are not always easy. Homelands are not always welcoming to those who are returning after long absences, especially if the homeland public regards them as having self-servingly avoided suffering from war, poverty, or oppression. Organizations may view with suspicion their attempts to introduce new ideas to their operations. Regional and local authorities can help with the re-integration of returning nationals, and it is in their interest to do so by employing their skills, by encouraging a warmer welcome by the local community, and by demonstrating leadership in this regard, including by encouraging the return of more of their ex-patriots.

Migration can affect homeland development in many ways. The role of integration and re-integration of returnees has been too long neglected.

I am an international migration researcher and was the Principal Investigator for a large scale mapping exercise on behalf of JMDI in the second half of 2013--the key results of which are summarized in the JMDI report that serves as a background document to this discussion. In addition, I served as the senior expert facilitator for the Mainstreaming of Migration into Development in Moldova programme (jointly implemented by UNDP, IOM and UN Women in partnership with the Moldovan State Chancellery), where we addressed questions of mainstreaming migration at the local and regional level.

I am glad to share some of our findings and my personal assessments with other members of the Migration4Development community.

Q: How can RLAS both in residence and origin countries better make use of decentralized cooperation frameworks to deal and manage issues related to migration and development?

During our study on local authorities’ practices in the field of migration and development we found several links to decentralized cooperation. In particular, local authorities can include migration-related aspects into their partnership relations with other local authorities, especially within city-to-city partnerships, or they can collaborate with migrants within the framework of decentralized development cooperation.

During our mapping exercise, we found that migrants were important parts of a city-to-city co-development partnership between local authorities in Montreuil (France) and Yélimané (Mali), Figuig (Morocco) and Ile of France (France), Batangas (Philippines) and Rome (Italy), and Munich (Germany) and Harare (Zimbabwe), Harlem Meer (Netherlands) and Cebu City (Philippines).

The involvement of migrants ranges from facilitating the initial contact, being advised as stakeholders in the process to being experts sent to their countries of origin. For example, the city of Munich reached out to a Munich-based information technology experts, who came from Zimbabwe to Munich more than a decade ago. The expert was then deployed to Harare for six weeks to develop a practical and effective IT infrastructure for the Harare City Council. This was meant to increase the efficiency of the administration and to render its work more transparent, particularly with respect to the municipal accounting and charging.

Facilitated by migrant associations and migration-related NGOs in the Philippines, the province of Batangas and the provincial government of Rome signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to facilitate information exchange, investment promotions and remittances for local development from the Province of Rome to the Province of Batangas.

The municipality of Vic in Catalonia, Spain has been implementing a co-development program that attempts to promote a positive relationship between migration and development. The municipality finds that by engaging Senegalese immigrants in Vic in both, integration and host community related activities, as well as in development activities in Senegal, Vic’s residents of Catalan and Senegalese origin have both learned much about the benefits of working altogether with all the actors of cooperation. According to the city’s self-assessment, the involvement of Senegalese immigrants has increased the quality of international development cooperation by Vic.

In 2009 and 2010, the Association of Local Democracy Agencies (ALDA) provided technical assistance to the decentralized cooperation programme existing between Aix en Provence (France) and Oujda in Morocco. The assistance provided facilitated the citizens’ consultation on the urban mobility plan and it offered different option on methodologies for citizens’ engagement. This specific initiative was included in the decentralized cooperation between the two communities and engaged citizens from the Moroccan diaspora.

The municipality of Turin created the Louga Coordination Committee and forged collaboration with two local associations to reinforce the social capital of Senegalese immigrants. The Friuli-Venezia Giulia Region created the Migrant and Cooperation Coordination Committee that implements certain activities in the south of Senegal.

Lastly, the Municipality of Faenza and the NGO ISCOS Emilia Romagna are involved in a decentralized cooperation project and the Pisa Senegalese Association is implementing a co-development project in collaboration with the North/South Association of the Province of Pisa.

Thus, it results clear that migration and diaspora-related topics are becoming part of the decentralized cooperation agenda. In spite of these examples, the mapping study showed that the potential is still underused and relies rather on ad-hoc involvement than on a structured approach to include diaspora actors into decentralized cooperation activities. A long-term approach needs capacity building of diaspora NGOs, institutions in the countries of residence that establish long-term partnerships and communication that assesses exactly where migrants and diaspora actors can be helpful. A pitfall of conceptualizing migrants’ involvement is to think that they would be development actors by the mere fact that they have (or may have) social capital in their localities of origin.

Q: What strategies can RLAs adopt to share lessons learned and best practices with other RLAs/national governments or other key stakeholders?

It is important to include RLAs at national platforms. Local government associations, such as Mayors Association, Association of Commune and local communities, etc., should play a larger role in facilitating such exchanges.

Q: Do you know of any examples/structures where migration was included into territorial development planning?

Processes of mainstreaming migration have been done or are underway in Naga City in the Philippines, the Calabarzon Region in the Philippines, and the Oriental Region in Morocco.

As national governments in developing economies are still struggling with including migration and diaspora aspects in a meaningful way into their development strategies it is no big surprise that local actors have not sufficiently addressed this area. In most countries, territorial plans follow national guidelines and national or regional development plans (top down rather than bottoms up).

National governments can increase the awareness of migration-related options at the local level by encouraging local authorities to include and discuss migration in their local development plans. To this end, migration should be included in planning guidelines for sub-national planning. In addition, it should be made sure that local authorities have the necessary financial, human and material resources to include migration-related aspects in participatory processes of development planning.

As one main outcome of the UNDP-IOM-UN Women joint pilot programme on Mainstreaming of Migration into Development in Moldova (MOMID), the national Government decided to include diaspora and migration references to a guide on drafting public policies (as an ex ante assessment). If such guidelines are sufficiently disseminated among regional and local authorities’ staff it seems likely that migration will be included in a more meaningful way into territorial development plans. Q: What were the main factors and challenges for dealing with migration as a cross-cutting issue in development planning?

1) Local actors have to overcome their perception that they do not have the mandate to deal with migration-related issues. I would tend to disagree with Marco Grandi’s (Office of International Solidarity and Cooperation, City of Milan, Italy) contribution who stated that “in the South it is often the case that local authorities don’t have competences over migration issues which is a typical “national” issue, dealt by national authorities.” It is correct that this is the viewpoint of many institional actors that do not have a 'classic' migration portfolio (that is, all local and central public authorities other than the Ministries of Interior, External Affairs and Labour).

However, I would claim that while local authorities should realize that while they do not have the competencies to deal with immigration or emigration, they have the formal and de facto responsibility to develop a certain policy segment or the geographical area under their jurisdiction and to foster the welfare of the population. In other words, from the general development competencies derives the power to plan and implement migration-related interventions. This is more related to terminology. While we call this area “migration&development” the use of diaspora investment, remittances, diaspora philanthropy, knowledge transfers, etc are not directly connected to the policy field of emigration but to the area of local development, health care, education, etc.

Thus, migration policies (and interventions) have to be differentiated from migration-targeted and migration-senstive development interventions.

2) Understanding how exactly migrants’ contribution can be harnessed. It is relatively easy to look at the total inward remittance figures and admire their scale. It is much more difficult--but also much more important--to understand what incentives can be established that make it a sensible, risk-free choice for male and female migrants and their families to allocate a part of these funds into specific projects that are in line with development priorities.

This relates also to the discussion contribution by Mamadou Sene, (Agence Régionale de Développement de Diourbel au Sénégal) who pointed out that migration is often seen as beneficial for social projects but to sustainable local development. Much more thinking has to be done how to provide migrants a good way to contribute to economic and social development while keeping their self-interest in mind, helping them to achieve their goals and thus based on a human development perspective. This also means that it should be considered more how contributions by lower-skilled migrants, female migrants, irregular migrants, etc. should be addressed and facilitated.

3) Often trust between diaspora actors and local government actors (and other stakeholders) is key. But in many countries, local government representatives doubt that diaspora actors would trust them given the general perception of corruption, bureaucracy, inefficiency, hidden agendas, etc. While trust is a critical aspect for migration-related projects often only the inception of such projects can create trust and to break the vicious cycle of non sufficient trust has to broken by starting projects that require trust even though initially the level of existing trust may be doubtful. 4) It is important to create adequate platforms and institutions for including diaspora actors and migrants and to connect them with local stakeholders (private sector, NGOs, ...). Such platforms and the continuing cooperation ensure also that all partners know about the limitations of each sides and create trust. Such platforms can be annual migrant days, bi-annual migration&development councils or other institutions.

I am Estrella Mai Dizon-Anonuevo, executive director of Atikha Overseas Workers and Communities Initiatives Inc. Our project "Maximizing the Gains and Minimizing the Social Cost of Migration in the Philippines" was one of the projects assisted by the EC-UN JMDI. We also implemented the project on "Mobilizing Migrant resources towards agriculture cooperatives in the Philippines" which was supported by the International Fund for Agriculture Development.

I would like to share some of our experiences in implementing migration and development initiatives at the national regional and local level.

Q: Could you share some best practices carried out by RLAs both in residence and origin countries that specifically target the integration and social inclusion of migrants and potentially linked this effort with co-development projects?

Atikha assisted the RLAs in Region 4 A which has the highest number of overseas Filipinos in addressing the social cost of migration and in ensuring that migrant remittances contribute to the long term development of the migrants, their families and communities. Some of the RLAS have established One Stop Migration Resource Centers catering to migrants and families left behind. The establishment of the One Stop Migration Resource Center is a long process of building the capacity of the RLAS and fulfilling the legal, financial, manpower/skills, physical requirements to set up comprehensive program for migrants. The RLAS are able to provide financial literacy seminars to migrants and families left behind, provide counselling services, operate as one stop information hub for government and NGO services for migrants. The capacity building of the RLAS was supported by EC-UN JMDI. Atikha was able to develop a template and training modules in building the capacities of the RLAS.

At present the RLAS are currently mapping investment opportunities for migrants and identifying areas where the RLAS can leverage their resources to attract investments of the migrants to their province of origin.

In Region 4 A, a multi-stakeholder migration and development committee was established under the Regional Development Council. This is chaired by a government organization - National Economic Development Authority and co-chaired by an NGO- Atikha. This committee is the platform for advocacy to the RLAS and coordinates and assist the various initiatives. To provide comprehensive program for migrants and families involves not only the RLAS but other stakeholders at the local level that includes national government agency representatives at the local level such as the Department of Agriculture, Department of Trade and Industry, Department of Labor and Employment, NGOs, cooperatives, microfinance etc.

RE: co-development

Since about 30-40% of the Filipino migrants in Rome are from the province of Batangas, there was consultation done between the province of Rome and province of Batangas on possible sister province partnership on migration and development. There is interest on both sides to forge this partnership. However, the changing political situations, resources required, advocacy and mentoring work to finalize the partnership are challenges that should be addressed.

In United Arab Emirates, the Ministry of Labor engaged Atikha to conduct training of trainers on financial literacy not only for Filipinos but also for migrants from India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. This program is being supported by private sector in UAE. Some of the employers of migrants are interested in integrating the training to their staff development and have requested Atikha to train their trainers.

Q: What are the main challenges for RLAs in making sure that migrants are active players in local governance and active citizenship?

The challenges not only for RLAs but also for migrants and advocates:

1. Migrants and their families are not the priority of RLAs since they are not the poorest of the poor in the area;

2. The majority of RLAs and migrants are not aware of the link between migration and development;

3. There are none or minimal programs existing which engages the migrants as actors in development;

4. Reaching the migrants and families left behind. Majority of the migrants are unorganized and keep to themselves.

Q: What can migrants themselves and /or other civil society organizations do to raise awareness about their needs and potentials and thus promote better service delivery specifically for migrants?

There should be advocacy, information and education program on migration and development on both sides of the migration corridor. There is a need for advocacy work on migration and local economic development to make the RLAS aware of the social cost as well as the potentials of migration. Building the capacities of migrants in destination country is critical. When migrants are organized and empowered, they are able to have the confidence to negotiate with authorities to address their issues and concerns.

Atikha was able to work with migrant organizations such as the Filipino Women's Council (FWC), Rome, Associazione Culturale Filippina del Piemonte (ACFIL) and other hometown associations in Italy and also with Bayanihan and Pinoy WISE in United Arab Emirates. We were able to build their capacities to become trainers on financial education and reach out to other migrants. The initiative was very successful and the migrant leaders are able to train more than 1,000 migrants in each country and still counting. This initiative did not only provide financial education but also mobilized investment in their province of origin. This caught the attention of the RLAS in destination and origin country and provided them with a concrete example on how migrants themselves become actors in development.

Based on our experience, RLAS once they recognized the potential of migration towards development, they are willing partners in the initiatives. Oftentimes the question we are confronted with is HOW? They need to see working models of engagements on addressing social cost and also in mobilizing investments, trade and tourism. We have organized a migration and development study mission for RLAS to show them various working models at the local level. We also organized study missions in country of destination to show the RLAS (provincial officers for social welfare, investment, trade, tourism and migrant center officers) to expose them to the realities, issues and potentials of migrants.

Below please find a few comments and observations on the topics for week 2 of our joint discussion.

While Howard Duncan (Metropolis Project, Canada), and Mamadou Abdoulaye MBENGUE (CARIMA - Enda Prospectives Dialogues Politiques, Sénégal) have also focused on reintegration practices in countries of origin, my comments will be limited to integration in the country of destination.

Q: Could you share some best practices carried out by RLAs both in residence and origin countries that specifically target the integration and social inclusion of migrants and potentially linked this effort with co-development projects?

As has been stressed by several other members, successful integration into the labour market and society in the host country can increase the potential of migrants to contribute to their country of origin. I agree with Howard Duncan (Metropolis Project, Canada), who stresses the importance of labour market integration and with Antonio García-Nieto (Région de Murcie, Spain), who highlights that the time spent in the locality of residence and the level of having established one’s own life positively affect the capacities of migrants to engage in development projects in their respective countries of origin.

As explored more in detail in my book Migration, Citizenship and Development (2013, Oxford University Press, see http://global.oup.com/academic/product/9780198084983), activities by diaspora actors may have direct, intermediary or indirect effects on the development of the source country. Direct effects stem from activities, interaction and involvement that directly affect the source country’s development. The most famous examples are remitting and investing. Intermediary effects are effects by which diaspora members act as agents for cooperation between third parties and actors in their home country (e.g., on behalf of their companies). Indirect effects are even further removed from direct actions and activities of diaspora actors. The entire diaspora community (or significant parts of it) can bring a change in the source country’s perception and appreciation. This is often referred to as the ‘branding value’ of migrants. Successful integration can increase the capacities of male and female diaspora actors for direct activities¾by increasing their income and social networks¾but also by enabling them to play a more vital role as intermediaries or as ‘brand ambassadors’ for their countries and localities of origin. Thus, while we tend to tend to think of the benefits of social, economic and political integration in the host country on direct activities, it seems important to also consider that through better integration (read for example: (1) a higher and more influential position in a host country’s company, or (2) more access to business networks, etc.) immigrants can also positively influence the decisions and activities by other actors with potential benefits for the localities of origin.

As an example for integration projects that are directly relevant for the field of M&D: the city of Munich in Germany runs a project on competence development for migrant enterprises. This project includes an annual award ceremony—the Phoenix Prize—praising the migrant economy. While this project focuses on immigrant entrepreneurs in the country of residence, it is obvious that strengthening migrants as business persons increases their potential to act as agents for international trade with their countries of origin, as investors and as access points for business networks.

In 2008, the Council of Europe and the European Commission launched a pilot programme in eleven cities to help cities take a culture-sensitive approach to integration. Also the United Nations Alliance of Civilization (UNAOC) Migration & Integration Program collects and supports many local and municipal projects and initiatives promoting coexistence between newcomers and communities worldwide (see, http://www.unaoc.org/ibis.). The Cities of Migration project is a promising platform to share and showcase good ideas at the local level on immigrant integration and promote innovative practices that create inclusion and urban prosperity (see, http://citiesofmigration.ca).

However, also local authorities in the Global South engage in activities with regard to the integration of immigrants from other countries in the South. In Ecuador, immigration is prominent on the policy agenda, especially with regard to Colombian refugees and Nicaraguans in the country. Thus, a local project provides support for the former and facilitates their integration into the communities of residence, including legal and psycho-social support. Also the Casa del Migrante caters to immigrants and refugees. An initiative in Ecuador focuses on support for children of migrants and their physical well being and nutrition, while another practice aims at supporting the integration of Brazilian families in Bolivia. Further, the Entre Vecinos (among neighbors) programme in Costa Rica encourages neighborhood integration for local development through the participatory involvement of community organizations, immigrants and refugees.

Active immigration management and social integration policies are also increasing in the global South. Recently, the city of Johannesburg in South Africa presented its plans and challenges in this regard. The city established a Migrant Advisory Committee, composed of the executive mayor, members of the mayoral committees, heads of relevant departments and municipal entities and representatives of institutions with expertise in the field of migration. The International Centre for Migration Policy Development’s (ICMPD) nascent City-to-City project that aims to establish city-to city integration plans and migration dialogues on the basis of sharing of good practices.

Often involving migrants into co-development projects has several advantages. Apart from the (potential) positive effect on additional expertise and cultural sensitivity in the co-development project, such collaboration can create trust and a positive relationship between a RLA and certain migrants/migrant associations. It seems important to highlight that successful ‘integration activities’ depend on such trust and on a good relationship between the partners. Often, immigrants have the feeling that host local authorities only talk to them about the “problems” of “immigrant integration” (which often is understood as: “your community’s lacking will to integrate and embrace our culture is a problem”). And understandably, most immigrants are not happy to see themselves as “problems”.

On the other hand, if local authorities want to cooperate with them to discuss and implement positive development projects in their communities of origin and immigrants are approaches as “assets”, this is likely to enhance their partnership potential for local authorities. This also counters fears of “anti-transnationalism”, as local authorities display that successful integration and homeland orientation are not mutually exclusive (something that is clear to researchers but which is often portrayed wrongly by mainstream discourse). Importantly, once a relationship of trust has been established, this can be the basis for collaborations on a range of issues that are unrelated to co-development initiatives.

Q: What are the main challenges for RLAs in making sure that migrants are active players in local governance and active citizenship?

Obviously, the answer differs if explored from the perspective of localities of origin or destination. I will focus my comments on local governance and active citizenship in the locality of residence.

One of the basic tenets of democracy is that people who are affected by decision should have a say in the decision. This is a basic principle that underlies the stakeholder approach, which goes beyond caring for “ voters” but to look at all people who are affected in one way or another by a certain activity.

To successfully engage immigrants and immigrant communities in local governance and to increase their active citizenship RLAs have to create spaces and platforms for interaction. These can be councils, regular town hall style meetings, neighbourhood committees etc. It is important to stress that immigrants should not be heard only to topics of “immigration and integration” but to increase their participation in broad range of topics that relate to them in their capacity as ‘citizens’ (not meaning necessarily formal-legal citizens), such as cultural projects, education, economic initiatives etc.

From the viewpoint of good local governance, it seems important to create spaces where migrant associations and entrepreneurs can find non-migrant or other migrant partners for projects in localities of origin and/or residence. In addition, the inclusion of migrant actors into decentralized cooperation projects with localities of origin--as discussed last week--may empower migrant communities and increase their capacities to design and implement their own development projects.

Q: What can migrants themselves and /or other civil society organizations do to raise awareness about their needs and potentials and thus promote better service delivery specifically for migrants?

I will limit my remarks to observations on the relationship between migrants and migrant organizations, on the one hand, and official service delivers in localities of residence.

Equitable access to quality services--especially with regard to health care, but also in the areas of education, social protection, etc--is considered a key element of empowering male and female migrants and to expand their capacities. However, as we all know, oftentimes such services are not geared toward internationally mobile populations.

When regional or local authorities have established participatory mechanisms, as discussed in the previous point, such platforms can be used to discuss shortcomings of existing service delivery. As in most localities of destination this is not the case or only in a limited way, migrants have to be more proactive to create channels for such awareness-raising efforts. First, it will be difficult of unorganized migrants to successfully create enough traction for their demands. Hence, it is critical to strengthen collective forms of claims-making through migrant associations, or even umbrella organizations.

Migrants and their organizations also have to consider three possible alliances to raise awareness: first, with mainstream media, second, with research institutions that can provide reliable evidence to back demands, and third, with mainstream civil society organizations.

Dear M4D - thank you for the opportunity to contribute. The last two weeks have been great learning opportunities.

I would like to add some thoughts, and suggestions for week 3 - please find here below:

I am the co-founder of Fund Finders Africa (http://fundfindersafrica.org). Our organization has recently partnered with a Kenyan diaspora led development initiative, which manages water supply and distribution systems in un-served and/or under-served communities. We actually chose this project by giving practical use to the best practices set out in the ‘Guidebook for Migration and Development.’

I agree with Daniel Naujok’s comments that “a long-term approach needs capacity building of diaspora NGOs, institution in the countries of residence that establish long-term partnerships and communication that assesses exactly where migrants and diaspora can be helpful.” This is exactly what FFA is doing.

We work directly with the diaspora association/group/individuals and provide appropriate ‘capacity building’ support with the aim to prepare their development initiatives ‘back home’ for the donor engagement. This requires going through the appropriate governance, management, program, fundraising and other systems and procedures, as well as providing tailored solutions and recommendations through the use cutting edge business/operational tools.

In response to some of the questions and great comments, made, I wanted to add FFA’s two cents to the discussion this week. I am a big fan of assessing the reality before developing any strategy or policy.

The following are some observations about two countries; Kenya and Senegal, in specific where FFA has collaborated with diaspora founded/led development initiatives. The following observations are based on encounters with members of the Kenyan and Senegalese diaspora. FFA asked specific questions on how to better the engagement with LRAs back home:

· More needs to be done in terms of raising awareness and sensitization about the role and contribution diaspora as development partners. The reality is that the ‘general’ perception about diaspora is limited to ‘flows of remittances’ both in country and overseas. The ‘general’ perception in country is that diaspora are coming back with the intention to take part in the ‘economic pie’, specifically in the construction sector, without actually doing anything in terms of development for the country.

This narrative needs to change fundamentally, and requires the collaboration of relevant partners in and outside of the country, that share a vision and the willingness to express a new vision on diaspora engagement ‘back home’. This vision needs to be expressed and driven first and foremost by the diaspora, receiving support from relevant government authorities (ie embassies), which also become a link between diaspora and relevant LRAs. Essentially, there is real need for stories from members of the diaspora, who have come back and are actually ‘doing good’ for their own or other communities - particularly also beyond ethnic lines.

In the absence of that shared vision, most policies will stay top-down.

· More incentives need to be built into the new narrative about the role and engagement of diaspora. One such incentive is by giving the diaspora a ‘political voice’. We have spoken to a number of Kenyan and Senegalese diaspora members, in the US, France, Senegal and Kenya, who stated every time that without a political voice at strategic levels, their development initiatives will simply not be taken serious.

In Kenya, the government has taken steps, in ensuring that the Kenyan diaspora can have a voice, by giving Kenyans living overseas an opportunity to vote, and also by assigning a member of parliament on diaspora matters. Similar approaches at county, or LRAs levels, are advocated for by diaspora groups, we have worked with.

Our Kenyan collaboration, although diaspora led and backed by the local public water utility organization in the county where it is implementing the projects, and formalized in an MoU, is purely ad hoc at this stage. Nevertheless, it has made local authorities realize that Haki Water is a genuine partner for development, and intends to invest in Kenya in the long-term. This perception has opened the organization to discussions with the other local water utility projects, and could potentially open the organization up to influencing the local development agenda.

· Many of the diaspora led development initiatives that we have encountered are constrained along ethnic, religious or other interest lines. This is a major impediment to making diaspora engagement in development credible in the long-term.

In Senegal for example, a women led diaspora association registered in France with a clear West-Africa focus, faced tremendous pressure from within Senegal: when they tried to channel funds collected to projects within different local communities with the support of the local authorities the Maribous (something that can best be described as a religious fraternity run by a muslim clergy) opposed any form of remittance that did not go through them and only to projects that the fraternity had selected. For some of the selected projects, a partnership between the diaspora association and the fraternity, could have addressed issues. But in the absence of trust, and lack of appropriate governance and accountability systems, the funds could not go to areas of development priority.

· Diaspora Associations that are run along ethnic/religious lines, and select projects along the same or similar lines of allegiance, may do great work, but will face most challenges to credibility and perception. Diaspora associations/groups that focus on developing and initiating local projects that fit with national development goals, have a better chance of being involved in the definition of local development planning strategies within their communities.

· A final comment about the need also to bridge a knowledge gap that exists between local/national run development initiatives, and their reach out to diaspora. We have noticed, that many locally run development initiatives are increasingly opening up to getting appropriate diaspora support – an area that we are focusing on. However, we have also encountered many other organizations, who either did not know what ‘engaging the diaspora’ is about, or did not in any way wish to be associated with any ‘diaspora’ angle. Without appropriate sensitization, many policies will regretfully stay ink on paper. Let’s therefore first start also by assessing the knowledge gap in at local levels.

We are of course available for any additional clarification or support.

Could you share some best practices carried out by RLAs both in residence and origien countries that specifically target the integration and social inclusión of migrants and potentially linked these efforts with co-devolpment projects?

What are the main challenges for RLAs in making sure that migrants are active players in local governance and active citizenship and what can migrants themselves and/or other civil society organizations do to raise awareness about their needs and potencials and thus promote better service delivery specifically for migrants?

As one of the agencies actively contributing to the JMDI, the International Organization for Migration is grateful for the useful interventions in these discussion fora. On behalf of the IOM Regional Office in Brussels covering the EEA countries and Switzerland, I would like to offer some of our views coming from the experience in this region.

The transnational nature of diaspora implies that these people are crucial when it comes to connecting countries and communities, because they can call on multiple networks, relate to different identities and share a sense of belonging to more than one community. The creation of appropriate conditions is essential to enable transnational communities to become effective agents for development. The degree to which diaspora can contribute is directly related to the ability of members of these communities to develop their full potential and acquire the necessary skills and resources. In research for the Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion of the European Commission in 2009-2013, the IOM’s Independent Network of Labour Migration and Integration Experts (LINET) identified a number of policy recommendations on immigrant integration in the labour market, which are also pertinent for consideration at the local level.

Among the many pertinent areas in this post I would like to highlight diversity management and anti-discrimination, recognition of qualifications and competences and promoting integrity in international recruitment.

The majority of employers in the EU are small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that experience difficulties in hiring and managing a diverse workforce due to the limited resources each of these entities can make available for developing and improving the appropriate practices. Counselling and support measures would be needed – especially for SMEs – to provide managers and human resources personnel with the capacity to correctly deal with cultural diversity-related issues in the hiring process, thus avoiding biased recruitment. Since discrimination and cultural diversity-related issues may also have a negative impact on the earning outcomes and job mobility of employees with a migrant background, anti-discrimination counselling and support should be provided not only for the recruitment process but through all the human resources management cycle.

Higher risks perceived by the employers in recruiting migrants as compared to natives are also partly attributable to the fact that the former generally have less access to personal networks to connect with the employer compared with natives. Although not always granting the more efficient employment matching in terms of productivity outcomes, hiring through personal referrals is often perceived as reassuring by employers. To reduce the relative disadvantage represented for resident migrants by a lack of or limited access to networks in the labour market of their country of destination, mentoring programmes have been implemented, with success, in many EU Member States and non-EU settlement countries, including on the city and regional levels.

Migrant-receiving localities would also benefit from implementing streamlined, transparent and time-efficient systems for the recognition and accreditation of foreign qualifications and competences. In an effort to reduce informational asymmetries between migrants holding foreign qualifications and other groups of workers and job-seekers as much as possible, those systems should allow for initiating the recognition procedure at the pre-departure stage. A good practice in this respect can be drawn from Germany, where the new Federal Law on Recognition of Foreign Qualifications came into force in April 2012 and provides for the possibility for prospective labour migrants to have their foreign qualifications assessed before their arrival in the country. The German Chambers of Commerce and the Chambers of Trade advise both potential apprentices with immigrant background and employers on vocational training, and certify providers of vocational training and apprenticeships. In Sweden, if a migrant has vocational experience from abroad but no documentary proof, different validation models developed within each sector are used to recognize the person’s knowledge and experience. In the Netherlands, where the social partners (industrial branches, trade unions, and employers’ organizations) actively participate in the design of assessment methods. Cooperation with the localities of origin on mutual recognition of qualifications and competences is crucial to enable effective circularity and/or return. Migration and development considerations need to be embedded in the bilateral and multilateral cooperation on education and compatibility of occupational profiles.

Further efforts are to include the development of incentive-based measures to promote ethical recruitment that upholds human and labour rights of migrants irrespective of the geographical location of recruitment. The IOM International Recruitment Integrity System (IRIS), which is planned to be launched in 2013 intends to constitute a voluntary accreditation and monitoring process of employers and recruitment agents that would verify their compliance with the international best practice in international recruitment. IRIS will thus establish a community of like-minded, socially responsible stakeholders, including regional and local actors involved in international recruitment and result in reduced vulnerability of migrant workers to exploitation and labour trafficking, and higher financial gains for migrants and their employers.

Overall, the decision of individuals to migrate and motivation to actively participate in the public life of the receiving community is driven not only by wage differentials, but also by the human and physical infrastructure of the destination and by the total immigration ‘package’ offered by the national or the local government. As noted by Brookings in its recent report on The 10 Traits of Globally Fluent Metro Areas (2013), “to compete internationally, metro leaders must embrace the interplay of global with local”. In addition to the clarity, fairness and transparency of immigration provisions, other factors are linked to the opportunity to realize personal and professional goals. This includes access to professional networks, universities and industrial clusters and a dynamic work environment overall. Fair, fast and transparent processes of recognition of migrants’ qualifications and competences can prevent the underutilization of skills. Those migrants who are intending long-term and permanent migration, possibly with their families, are likely to place more emphasis on factors such as the social model of a society, the portability of benefits and the quality of life at the destination than younger, single foreign workers who focus merely on advancing their career and building wealth. Most people, and migrants are no exception, appreciate living in an open, safe and tolerant society, which embraces diversity. See further analysis on the above and other relevant topics at

Dr. Olubunmi Ajayi from the Centre for African Local Government Improvement (CALGI) in the United Kingdom wrote:

As the CEO of the CALGI, my interest is really in strengthening Local Governments to realize their potential as development organizations and I would like to share with you some of the experiences drawn from my work.

In the first place, only functional and performing RLAs have the capacity to implement effective outreach and communications strategies. Secondly, a key success factor is the understanding of the role of RLAs by migrant communities as although migration is inherently place-based and local, it is usually dealt with at national/federal level.

Outreach and communications strategy for engaging migrant communities must be built into all aspects local government planning and service delivery. This includes seeing migration as and integral part of local society and migrants as recipients of services. Some of the ways of ensuring success include:

Establishing a regular forum for local government officials and line agencies, including border officials, to meet and exchange information on migration-related information and programmes.

Developing local information sources on population statistics, including information from other government departments, rather than relying exclusively on outdated and inaccurate national statistics as the basis for service planning. These local statistics should focus on permanence or transience of local residence and community membership rather than only on nationality and citizenship and they should clearly disaggregate different kinds of migrants.

Develop regular communication and coordination structures with migrant communities on matters relating to the movement of people in localities and service provision, as part of a process towards regional integration.

Use public spaces as facilitators of engagement with the migrant communities. People come togetherin public places such as street, bus garages, public transport and other areas that are governed by local government. RLAs should use these spaces for outreach and engagement purposes.

RLAs should have tools and processes in place for hearing the ‘voices’ of migrant communities and following up with actions. Communication strategies should be inclusive and real.

It is very important for RLAs to recognise the important role they play in migration and integration. RLAs are the closest sphere of government to people and are most impacted by the settlement outcomes of migrants. It is therefore crucial to the development of outreach and communications strategies for RLAs to take action on migration across all policy areas within local authorities.

Better intergovernmental coordination and greater engagement with RLAs and migrant communities remain an area for improvement. It is one thing for RLAs to believe they have a role but this also depends on mandate, functions and powers given to RLAs by constitution. Clarity around mandate, functions and powers would help RLAs to develop more effective communications and outreach strategies for engaging the migrant communities as well as help to develop explicit migration management and local development planning – which they can share through communications campaigns.

We would like to share some reflections based on the experience of UNDP ART in migration and development. Before going to the subject, allow me to briefly introduce ART. As a global programme from UNDP, the ART Initiative promotes a territorial approach to development supporting local, regional and national governments in harmonizing and aligning development efforts of multiple actors operating at the sub-national level.

Through its ART programmes, UNDP facilitates multi-stakeholder partnerships and dialogue mechanisms led by authorities at local and regional levels, with participatory platforms at the local and national level to coordinate the planning and implementing activities of sub-national authorities, central governments, civil society, the private sector, academia, and decentralised cooperation partners.

Territorial approach to migration and development

Within the areas of work of ART with Local and Regional Governments (LRGs), the issue of migration is a recurrent one, as it is the local level where the causes triggering migration and its effects emerge and are felt more strongly. ART’s work in migration and development has mainly focused on supporting LRGs in: managing migration as an integral part of the territorial development planning and strategies; ensuring long-lasting social and economic integration of migrants; promoting territorial economic development as basis to tackle the structural causes of migration; facilitating the articulation between local and national processes; developing capacities to tackle the causes of migration and face its effects; and in promoting decentralized cooperation partnerships for the exchange of experiences and know-how, which also serve to build bridges between communities and cultures that go beyond the cooperation intervention.

Ecuador

In the case of Ecuador, the UNDP ART Programme is the framework of the implementation of Development and Migration processes and programmes. ART Programme has linked migration issues to existing mechanisms in the territories that have been developed within the ART Programme’s framework - Territorial Working Groups and Local Economic Development Agencies. Through the territorial approach and ART Programme methodology, mechanism and instruments, the Youth, Migration and Employment Programme of UNDP/Spain Millennium Development Goals Achievement Fund has been implemented, guaranteeing the alignment of a development initiative to territorial planning and the local agenda. Thanks to its interventions, the ART Programme strengthened the local economic development with the inclusion of population at risk, through the coordination among interventions at local, national and international levels, supported initiatives of revenue creation, with a focus on potential migrants and immigrants, and specific emphasis on women and youth. It concretely contributed to inclusive development through the generation of 1134 youth enterprises (570 of them led by women), the financial and non-financial assistance to 1479 young business (of these, 1,142 young women), the strengthening of 18 local financial institutions and of 3 Local Economic Development Agencies to provide services to local youth; the creation of a system that supports entrepreneurship and local economic development; and the transformation of the National Programme for Popular Finances to the National Corporation of Popular and Solidary Finances. In case of the JMDI programme, ART will provide a consolidated base of participatory and territorial work through a local working group and territorial development agendas.

El Salvador

In the case of El Salvador, the ART programme is supporting local governments in the management of local economy, and within this, of potential migrants and immigrants. Concrete activities are related o the set up of a service center for women entrepreneurship, the strengthening of the productive fabric through long-term strategic processes, the set-up of the Local Economic Development Agencies (LEDA) in the Departments of La Union and Usulutan, which gather local economic development actors (local governments, civil society and private actors) for the implementation of a strategic process of local economic development, and the technical support to the tri-national community of the Golfo de Fonseca on issues related to migration and development. The LEDAs and service centers for entrepreneurship facilitate efficient management of migrant labor and provide advice and training to potential migrants, particularly women and youth, to facilitate their effective integration into the economic and social fabric.

This website has been produced with the assistance of the European Union and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation.
The content of this website cannot be taken to reflect the views of the European Union, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, the IOM, or the United Nations, including UNDP, UNFPA, UNHCR, UN WOMEN, ILO, or their member states.